Interview transcript:

 

Terry Gerton The nation’s waterways may have some more reckless driving on them. Among the Trump administration’s cuts to government spending, the Coast Guard planned to cut funding for boating safety grants to states and nonprofits. To find out what this could mean for the maritime community, and to get a little more insight into how they work, Federal News Network’s Eric White spoke with David Kennedy, government affairs manager for the boat insurance company BoatUS.

Eric White Mr. Kennedy, thanks for joining us.

David Kennedy Thanks, Eric, for having me.

Eric White So how does this Coast Guard recreational boating safety grant work, or how do these grants work? You know, how much are we talking about here and where does the money necessarily go to?

David Kennedy What we’re initially talking about here are the Coast Guard Nonprofit Recreational Boat Grants, which I am happy to report have been renewed for 2025, which was one of the things that was in question, but we have those going forward. And these go out to several different groups, and I’ll say including the BoatUS Foundation for Clean Water and Safe Boating. But it’s used for a variety of issues. One of the groups is the National Association of Boating Law Administrators, and these are the state-level folks who really deal with recreational boats in their states and their safety programs. It trains law enforcement, local law enforcement and the operation of boats, helps coordinate, gives us uniform laws. Another group supported by it is the American Boat and Yacht Council, which is really the standard-setting body for the design of recreational boats, making sure we have safe recreational boats. So overall, this program is supported through the something called the Sport Fish Restoration and Boating Trust Fund. This is a program that takes the taxes paid by boaters through motor fuel tax, tax on fishing equipment, about six different sources of funds, that then goes back out to boating safety and boating access and environmental programs. So it’s a long-standing program that we have a lot of support for. The nonprofit grants are about $6.5 million a year. The overall trust fund is in the neighborhood of $650 million to $700 million dollars per fiscal year.

Eric White Okay. And so from that fund, there is also some federal funding that comes into play here. Those go to fund boating safety programs and the like. Do I have that correctly, or what is the government participation in this?

David Kennedy Sure. So like I said, it’s talking about the Sport Fish Restoration and Boating Trust Fund that takes in boaters’ taxes, and anglers — I should say recreational anglers. So every time you buy a fishing pole, there’s a tax on that. And those funds come into the come into the federal government and they’re then dispersed back out to programs that benefit the end users. So we call it a “user-pay, user-benefit” program. The nonprofit grants are one example. It also funds Coast Guard’s program to the states for their boating safety programs. So you go to Virginia or Maryland, they have their state DNR, or every state does it a little bit differently, that provides a level of their funding as well. And that also is matched by boat registration fees and other fishing licenses, so that it’s a real compounding effect. We call it a cycle of success that really supports the overall system that then our members go out and enjoy.

Eric White We’re speaking with David Kennedy, the manager of government affairs at BoatUS. All right, so then the idea came about, hey, let’s stop all that. Let’s cut that bit of funding out, reallocate resources, whatever they had planned for. What was the controversy at stake?

David Kennedy I think the question was folks not really understanding what the program was and what it did. And so that’s where roles for association like BoatUS come in. And we were able to have a dialog with the administration, with the folks in Congress who support us. We have great support from the House Transportation Committee Chairman Graves and Ranking Member Larsen, from Sen. Cruz and Sen. Cantwell, and just to bring them up to speed on what this program means and how it is able to go out and support and, as I said, we’re able to happily report that it has in fact been funded for 2025. Now, you know, it’s certainly incumbent on us to continue to make sure folks understand why this is important and how it goes back into the programs that the boaters and the anglers all support.

Eric White Not to have you have to rehash old turf, but what was in your pitch in those conversations with the government officials on the effect that these grants have on boating safety and any other restoration efforts?

David Kennedy I think for a number of the nonprofits that get this group, this is a decent part of their funding. And they were going to have to make some hard choices about which you know which programs they were able to support, which they could do going forward. So I think it was helping them to understand what these programs did. And I’ll go back to the example of the National Association of State Boating Law Administrators, where they really provide a link between Coast Guard and the states, and the state on water law enforcement. So I think that was that was a piece of it. Understanding the standard-setting piece of it and how that really makes the whole process of getting safety design updates out there into the system. And at this point, the you know, the U.S. standards are the world standards. You know, everybody looks to the United States and to ABYC for how they’re going to safely design a boat. And we wanted to make sure folks understood that keeping that piece running was important. So those were some of the things we touched on. And then we do things like, we have a life jacket loaner program. So, you know, you’re going to take the grandkids out and you don’t have a child-sized life jacket. Well, you can come to BoatUS and borrow one. So there’s programs like that as well that are just real simple, good safety and make it so people can go out and have fun and be safe on the water.

Eric White Can you give us a snapshot of the effect that programs like this have on boating safety and where we stand as a country when it comes to boating safety? Growing up here in Maryland, I still see that the waterways are as crowded as ever. But as we know, more participation means more potential situations for trouble. Where do things currently stand?

David Kennedy That’s the good news. It’s a very safe activity. And like anything, you have to be cautious and think about the risks. But overall, in 2024, we had the lowest number of fatalities that we’ve had since they started keeping records. In 1971, they passed the [Federal Boat Safety Act]. The estimate is that we’ve prevented over 100,000 deaths since that passed. So I think all of these programs are going to improve boating safety, but we’ve got to continue that work. And that was one of the things that we emphasized when we were discussing this program and continue to do. I mean you speak about Maryland — Maryland was actually the first state that put in a requirement for on-water education, or for boater education, I should say. And since then, that that concept has really spread across the nation. And in fact, BoatUS’s own foundation, we’re the largest provider of free online boating education. So people can come to boatus.org and they can get their boater education certification … and again, that’s how we’re keeping boating safe and trying to improve that. So those are the kinds of things that this all supports.

Eric White On that theme of continuance, you had mentioned that you know, you’re all set for 2025, after having to do a little bit of lobbying on your part. What do things look like going forward? Do you think that you’ll be able to maintain that level of communication with the powers that be, you know, whether or not any different personnel may be involved?

David Kennedy I mean, I believe so, but that’s my job to believe such things. And again, we’ve got a great working relationship with the Coast Guard and with the Department of Homeland Security. I always will point out to folks when people are 18 years old and deciding to go to the Coast Guard Academy for their career, they did it because they wanted to help people. And so that’s why it’s such a great agency to work with. The trust fund is up for reauthorization in the coming year. It’s done about every five years. The legislation has been introduced, it’s bipartisan. This is one of these issues that is supported by everyone out there. They understand how it works, and there’s a really good community of interest groups like ourselves that work with and make sure that folks understand that this works. So I remain optimistic. It really is a system that that feeds itself. I think you get to boaters and anglers, they understand that we’ve got the most interest in protecting the resource and we’ve got to contribute to it. So I feel like we’ll be okay. But we have to continue to tell the story and let folks know why it’s important.

The post What keeps recreational boaters safe, and what happens if the funding dries up? first appeared on Federal News Network.

© The Associated Press

Cameras that automatically capture images of vehicle license plates are being turned off by police in jurisdictions across Washington state, in part after a court ruled the public has a right to access data generated by the technology.

Police in Stanwood and Sedro-Woolley turned off their cameras before the Nov. 6 ruling in Skagit County Superior Court, and Redmond, Lynnwood and Skamania County turned off their cameras after the ruling, according to a report in The Seattle Times on Tuesday.

The debate stems from the use of Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs) made by Flock Safety, and whether the images and data collected by the cameras are subject to release under Washington’s Public Records Act.

According to court records and the Times, Jose Rodriguez, a tattoo artist who works in Walla Walla, filed public records requests for the ALPR photos and data of about 50 public agencies across Washington.

“The government can’t just put a tracker on us without a warrant, but these (cameras) are basically doing the same thing,” Rodriguez told the Times. He sued 10 cities, including Sedro-Woolley and Stanwood, that didn’t provide their images and data after his public records requests.

“The Flock images generated by the Flock cameras … are public records,” Judge Elizabeth Neidzwski wrote in her ruling, adding that the images are “created and used to further a governmental purpose” and were paid for and generated for the benefit of the cities fighting not to release the data.

ALPR cameras are intended as a public safety tool, to automatically alert officers and analysts when a vehicle linked to a crime, missing person, stolen vehicle, or other critical incident is detected.

The cameras do not use facial recognition or random surveillance, and images and data are supposed to be deleted from Flock’s cloud-based storage system within 30 days.

Flock Safety told the Times that privacy concerns about its technology are unjustified, and that the company’s cameras take pictures of vehicles on public roads, where there is no expectation of privacy. The company said it is advocating a “legislative fix” to Washington’s Public Records Act.

Privacy advocates argue that the technology could be used for mass surveillance. Researchers at the University of Washington Center for Human Rights reported last month that 18 Washington police agencies had their Flock Safety databases searched this year by the U.S. Border Patrol. The state’s “Keep Washington Working Act” bars most state agencies from cooperating with immigration enforcement.

The Redmond Police Dept. started deploying ALPR cameras this summer but turned them off earlier this month after U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents arrested seven people, and raised concerns that ICE had accessed the city’s Flock data.

In another incident, a Redmond man was detained when police acted on an alert generated by a Flock camera. KING 5 reported that the system wrongly flagged the man’s car as being “associated” with his son, who shares his name and was wanted on a felony warrant.